ITAT remands matter to CIT(A) for Fresh Hearing, allowing Assessee another Opportunity to Explain Delay [Read Order]
After considering the circumstances, the ITAT decided that fairness required the assessee be given a chance to present the case, and thus, remanded the matter for further proceedings
![ITAT remands matter to CIT(A) for Fresh Hearing, allowing Assessee another Opportunity to Explain Delay [Read Order]](https://www.taxscan.in/wp-content/uploads/2024/11/ITAT-Assessee-appeal-delay-Income-Tax-taxscan.jpg "ITAT remands matter to CIT(A) for Fresh Hearing, allowing Assessee another Opportunity to Explain Delay [Read Order]")
The Bangalore Bench of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ( ITAT ) remanded the matter to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)] for a fresh hearing, allowing the assessee, another opportunity to explain the delay in filing the appeal. Alampalli Seetharam Udaya Shankar, appellant-assessee, had filed an appeal against the order of the CIT(A) dated 21.07.2024, passed under Section 250...
The Bangalore Bench of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ( ITAT ) remanded the matter to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)] for a fresh hearing, allowing the assessee, another opportunity to explain the delay in filing the appeal.
Alampalli Seetharam Udaya Shankar, appellant-assessee, had filed an appeal against the order of the CIT(A) dated 21.07.2024, passed under Section 250 of the Act, for the Assessment Year (AY) 2015-16. The assessee requested the tribunal to condone a delay of one day in filing the appeal, which was due to the ill health of the Income Tax Practitioner (ITP). The tribunal accepted the explanation and condoned the delay, proceeding to hear the appeal on its merits.
Raise Funds Smarter – Your Guide to SME IPO Success- Click here to enroll
The CIT(A) had dismissed the appeal without considering its merits, as the assessee had failed to file a response to the notices issued by the CIT(A) within the prescribed time, resulting in a delay of 246 days. The CIT(A) had observed that the assessee did not submit any written representation, and an ex-parte order was passed. The assessee, however, contended that the notices were not physically served and were only made available on the e-filing portal, which he had not been made aware of.
The two member bench comprising George George K (Vice President) and Padmavathy S (Accountant Member) after considering the arguments, decided that the assessee should be given another opportunity to present the case before the CIT(A).
Raise Funds Smarter – Your Guide to SME IPO Success- Click here to enroll
It was felt that justice and fairness required a fresh opportunity for the assessee to explain the delay in filing the appeal. As a result, the tribunal remanded the matter back to the CIT(A) for further proceedings.
In conclusion, the appeal filed by the assessee was allowed for statistical purposes.
To Read the full text of the Order CLICK HERE
Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
